tv Congressional Career of Representative Carolyn Mc Carthy CSPAN November 24, 2014 9:00pm-10:01pm EST
members. town -- newtown, we brought in and remembers here and we brought in hunters. they did not know that so many thousands at thousands of people do they go hunting. when i was watching the discovery channel, everything that had to do with hunting, you can appreciate that is their support. i don't think i've ever talked about that. my husband and i were greats skiiers. shooting.ing, we go all our friends in vermont were hunters. i just did not like it as a sport. i probably would not even want to taste a deer. we have come a long way.
my colleagues on both sides of the aisle look at the issue a little differently. i think the biggest difference yes, all thes different people that are trying to reduce gun violence in this country came together with one voice. i think that is the most important thing. i tried to do that years ago but cannot get everybody together. between this job and trying to of supporterss together was extremely difficult. i am going to say mayor bloomberg made a big difference. those that have been trying to change the gun safety laws -- we never had any money. here you had mayor bloomberg saying he will support us to come together. that is what we are seeing now.
we still have a long way to go as far as i'm concerned on the federal level. i happen to believe we should be working on the state level as we saw washington state and colorado in this last election passing laws. if we can make the members here comfortable -- they are petrified of the nra. please don't think that when the nra says something, they listen. we have to change that attitude. that there any other lobby has as much influence on other side of the aisle as the nra? >> not really. i worked with the nra. we did get a bill passed. we work together to get it passed. that is through funding. they get more funding through the courts to upgrade their computer systems. then there was some other gun groups out there that were going
after the nra. they became very, very militant with their message again. they were scared. people thatot of earn a lot of money at the top of the nra. they get their money from the gun manufacturers. i don't understand what the government is not with us because gun safety should be one of their priorities. this was a signature issue for you but not the only issue you worked on during your time in congress. on the one hand, was a difficult reputationrough the of being an advocate for this to accomplish other goals you wanted to do? >> actually not. mainly because -- i know i keep going back to my nursing but my s alwaysan chairman
respected a lot of the amendments that i was able to get through on the different committees. they saw me as an who i was. yes, this is my issue and a lot of them probably would've liked to vote with me on reducing gun violence but that is not what they came here for. reelection, my opponents would always say she is only a one issue candidate. i have always been proud to say that is absolutely right but at least i have an issue. inon't know any other woman his earth that only has one issue. when you look at the bills that did get past, they usually have to do with children. i chose to be on the education committee because i felt if i could work with young children in my district and across the country -- if there was a way of getting them not to go into
s, most of these were underserved communities. i kept reminding my communities that mass killings were in the midwest where there was no minorities at all. my job was also to save the children and hopefully they grew up in other best opportunities in life. >> among those pieces of legislation you sponsored, which are you most proud of? >> gosh. getting the bill passed with president bush signing it. that had to be one of my proudest moments because it was only bill passed in 14 years. the other bills had to do with the children and nutrition. i had a nutrition bill in
education for years. it cannot get any traction. mrs. obama came and made that her main focus. with that being said, a number that schools got programs was like when i was a child. the mothers and grandmothers went into the kitchen and made fresh fruit for the children. it worked out terrific. the program took a year. to have that bill signed, working with the late senator kennedy, i was like, wow. you can accomplish a lot. im sure even the majority of my constituents have no idea how many bills i got passed. biggest flaws probably -- you do something, you get it passed and you moved on.
people ask what bills i got past and i would have to stop and think because i was already working on something else. again, that is just the way i am. >> what would your message be to incoming members of congress about ways to be effective and getting legislation passed? >> really get to know your colleagues on both sides of the aisle. even if someone is totally against why you came in and what you were trying to do with your key piece of legislation. find other ways. i can name a couple of my colleagues that nobody would ever think you could work with them. it's not true. >> please, go ahead. >> fox. i happen to like her. she was a head of a committee college. i had great inches with that because it had to do with education. we tried to work together with
legislation and financial services. things i believe in. crash,ly after the great as i call it, we voted for tarp. there were some pieces of the legislation that needed to be fixed. republicans and myself worked together to fix them. don'tter how you see, judge someone just because on the floor they are yelling and screaming. find out what their interest is and work with them. i think that would make us a better congress. >> we are sitting in your office in what is going to be your last really few days here. the walls are getting pretty empty. where is all your stuff going? >> tulsa university. one of the universities in garden city approached me when i was announcing my retirement. i have worked with a delphi
university for many years. getting them grants. said theydown and would like to do in exhibit next spring. i am going, why? really, why? they just about took everything. a lot of things will only be on loan to them. there are things i want to keep not for myself but hopefully for my grandchildren to look back and say wow, look at all the stuff she has. all of the photos. you can see all the holes covere d. each one reminds you of the opportunities i had to travel overseas. i was part of nato. i had a love of history. politicians -- know politicians all over europe and come back to educate my constituents on why we had to do something.
there are things down here they took away was basically traveling. we have a lot of members that said they were so proud they did not have passports. if you look at what we do basis, members should get to know why they are voting for something. membership knows the money that we spend, especially in third world countries, how that helps them to grow and be lifted up to be self-sustaining. we have seen that. the rolled bank or the international policy fund -- you give $100 to a woman to open up her own business to become self-sustaining. that is wonderful. i am so proud to see something that has grown over the years because we were part of it.
the united states of america was part of it. i know my constituents -- why are we giving all this money away? it is not like we are giving it away. we are trying to make those country's self-sustaining so we would not have to give them so much money in the future. that has happened. elections for the leadership for the new congress. questions asked of mrs. p and the the press freshman of the leadership team -- whether you need to do be younger voices or a group of leaders. how we wereng thinking about the institution you are leaving behind and the leadership team. are they equipped for it? >> i think they are but i also think we have a lot of talented younger members. it is not just, by the way, mrs. pelosi. i think she has been a great
leader and is really good at raising money. that is not one of my fortes. but, they need to start training younger people into the caucus to become hopefully the future leaders. that ithe things certainly believe with all my heart and soul -- you have to know when to leave. nancy obviously does not feel this is the time to leave. many thought she might stay for maybe this coming year. hopefully, turn the reins over to somebody else. when i look around, is anybody really ready to replace her? it is a hard job. i give her a lot of credit for what she is been able to do. but, i think it is time the leaders start looking at who is going to fill my spot? we are all replaceable.
there might be some bumps in the road but i always believe it is time to see younger people take our spots with fresh ideas. i see nothing wrong with that. that is a normal progression. >> saying that your family want you back home -- what are your own intentions about what your life will be? do you intend to stay involved in the elective politics or helping the party in any way? >> i don't know if i will stay in the politics of it. which im hoping to do am making plans to do is to go into some of the colleges and educate. i think i can give a great voice to those who are taking political science. what they read about in the books is not real. we get interns here from all the local universities. after they are here for three weeks, they say this is nothing like what we are learning in
school. interns ask the young if they are republican or democrat. i don't even ask my staff. because i think they need to learn that whether it is republican issue or democratic issues, what is best. i look to give them the knowledge i have learned all of these years. i am probably going to dip my hand a little bit into nursing and teaching nursing. -- teach nursing. i don't want to say teach nursing. i want to say with all the technology that is out there that is terrific for the patients, you still have to go back to holding that patient's hand. you have to go back and educate the family if it is all right to touch the patient or hold them, work with them. that makes the patient heal so much faster.
i know i keep going back to it but that is what i do here with my colleagues. they always said if you want a friend, get a dog when you work down here. i did not find that at all. republicans and democrats would call me. they would send me cards, flowers. i am a gardener. i loved it. but, i can say that you have to reach out if you want friendship down here. i know everybody gets tied up with going to the receptions in the evening. you have to do some of that stuff. take time out to -- >> thank you for your patience. i have a statement at the very beginning and then i will be happy to answer some questions.
i would likeemost, to extend my deepest symbol these to the family of michael brown. as i have said in the past, i know that regardless of the circumstances here, they lost a loved one to violence. i know the pain that accompanies such a loss knows no bounds. on august 9, michael brown was shot and killed by police officer darren wilson. within minutes, various accounts of the incident began appearing on social media. the town was filled with speculation and little if any solid accurate information. anger beganiately, brewing because of the various descriptions of what had happened and because of the underlying tensions between the police department and a significant part of the neighborhood. the st. louis county police conducted an extensive investigation of the crime scene. under varying trying circumstances and erupted very at least once by gunfire. continuing after that, they
along with the agents of the fbi at the direction of attorney general eric holder, located numerous individuals and gathered additional evidence and information. fully aware of the unfounded but growing concern in some parts of our community that the investigation and review of this tragic death might not be fair, i decided immediately that all of the physical evidence gathered, all people claiming to have witnessed any part or all of the shooting, and any and all other related matters would be presented to the grand jury. community of this selected by a judge in may of this year long before the shooting occurred. i would like to briefly expand upon the unprecedented cooperation of the local and federal authorities. when attorney general holder first announced the investigation just days after the shooting, he pledged that federal investigators would be
working with local authorities as closely as possible at every step of the way and would follow the facts wherever it may take us. we both pledged are separate investigations will follow the trail of facts with no preconceived notion of where that journey would take us. the only goal was that our investigation would be thorough and complete to give the grand jury, the department of justice and ultimately, the public all available evidence to make an informed decision. all evidence obtained by federal authorities was immediately shared with st. louis county investigators. all evidence gathered by st. louis county police was immediately shared by the federal investigators. additionally, the department of justice conducted its own examination of evidence and performed its own autopsy. atther autopsy was performed request of the brown family and his information was also shared. just as importantly, all testimony before the st. louis county grand jury was
immediately provided to the department of justice. although the investigations are separate, both of the local and federal government have all of the same information and evidence. our investigation and presentation of the evidence of the grand jury and st. louis county has been completed. the most significant challenge encountered in this investigation has been the 24-hour news cycle and the sensational appetite for something to talk about. following closely behind with the rumors on social media. i recognize the lack of accurate detail surrounding the shooting frustrates the media and the general public and helps breed suspicion among those already stressed out by the system. the close regarded details gives law enforcement yardstick to measure the truthfulness. eyewitness accounts must always be challenged and compared against the physical evidence.
many witnesses to the shooting of michael brown made statements inconsistent with other statements they made and also conflicted with the physical evidence. some were completely refuted by the physical evidence. an example -- before the result of an autopsy was released, witnesses claim they saw officer wilson stand over michael brown and fire many rounds into his back. others claim that officer wilson shot mr. brown in the back as mr. brown was running away. however, once the autopsy findings were released showing michael brown had not sustained any wounds to the back of his body, no additional witnesses made such a claim. several witnesses adjusted their stories in their subsequent statements. some even admitted they did not witness the event at all but merely repeated what they heard in the neighborhood or assumed. fortunately for the integrity of
our investigation, almost all of initial witness interviews, including those of opposite wilson were recorded. the statements in the testimony of most of the witnesses were presented to the grand jury before the autopsy results were released by the media and before several media outlets publish information from reports they receive from a d.c. government official. priorrors were therefore to the release of the information being public and what followed in the new cycle -- the jurors were able to assess the credibility of the witnesses, including those witnesses who statements and testimony remained consistent throughout every interview and were consistent with the physical evidence. my assistants begin presented to the grand jury on august 23 the evidence was presented in organized an orderly manner. the jurors gave us a schedule of when they could make. presenturors were
for every session and heard every word of testimony and examined every item of evidence. beginning august 20 and continuing until today, the grand jury worked tirelessly to examine and re-examine all of the testimony of the witnesses and all of the physical evidence. they were extremely engaged in the process asking questions of every witness, requesting specific witnesses, requesting specific information and asking for certain physical evidence. they met on 25 separate days in the last three months, heard more than 70 hours of testimony from about 60 witnesses and reviewed hours and hours of recordings of media and law enforcement interviews by many of the witnesses who testified. they heard from the three medical examiners and experts on blood, dna, toxicology, firearms and drug analysis. the examined hundreds of photographs, some of which they asked to be taken.
the examined various pieces of physical evidence. they were presented with five indictments ranging from murder in the first degree to involuntary manslaughter. their burden was determined based upon all of the evidence androbable cause existed that darren wilson was the person to commit the crime. there is no question that darren wilson caused the death of michael brown by shooting him but the inquiry does not end there. the loft arises a law enforcement officer used deadly force in certain situations. to use allows all people deadly force to defend themselves in certain situations. the grand jury considered whether wilson was the initial aggressor. in this case are whether there was probable cause to believe that darren wilson was often arise as a law enforcement officer to use deadly force in this situation or if he acted in
self-defense. i detail this for two reasons. first, so that everybody will know that as promised by me and attorney general holder, there was a full presentation of all evidence an appropriate instruction to the grand jury. second, as a caution to those in and out of the media who will pounce on a single sense or witness and decide what should have happened in this case based on that tiny bit of information, the duty of the grand jury is to separate fact from fiction. after a full and impartial examination of all the evidence involved and decided that evidence supported the filing of any criminal charges against aaron wilson, they accepted the responsibility. it is important to note and say again that they are the only who havehe only people heard and examined every witness
and every piece of evidence. debated theed and evidence among themselves before arriving at their collective decision. after their exhaustive review, the grand jury deliberated and made their final decision. no probablened that cause exists to file any charges against officer wilson and return a no true on each of the five indictments. the physical and scientific evidence examined by the grand jury combined with a witness statement supported and substantiated by that physical evidence held the accurate and tragic story of what happened. the very general synopsis of the testimony and the physical evidence presented to the grand i havellows -- as promised, the evidence presented to the grand jury with some ofeptions and the testimony the witnesses called to the grand jury will be released at the conclusion of this statement.
onapproximately 11:45 a.m. saturday the ninth of august, ferguson police officer darren dispatch to an emergency involving a two-month-old infant having trouble breathing. a.m., wilson3 heard a radio broadcast of stealing in progress at a market i. the broadcast also included a brief description of the subject. a black male, wearing a white t-shirt and a box of swisher cig ars. officer wilson remained with the mother and the infant until ems arrived. thecer wilson left apartment complex in his police vehicle, a chevy tahoe suv. an additional description of the suspect was released at that time. he was with another male.
as officer wilson was attending to his emergency call, michael brown and a companion were in the local convenience store. theael brown's activity in store was recorded by the store security cameras. the video often played following his release in august by the ferguson police department shows michael brown grabbing a handful of cigarillos and heading toward the exit without paying. as michael brown and his companions left the store, somebody inside called the police. the two walked east into the middle of the street. mr. brown directly behind his companion. as officer wilson continued west, he encountered mr. brown and his companions to walking in the middle of the street. , he told themed to move to the sidewalk. words were exchanged and they continued to walk down the
middle of the street. wilson observed that michael brown had cigarillos in his hand when was wearing a red hat. p.m.,roximately 12:02 wilson radioed he had to individuals and needed assistance. officer wilson backed his vehicle at an angle blocking their path and blocking the flow of traffic in both directions. several cars approached from both east and west but weren't able to pass the vehicle. altercation took place with officer wilson seated inside the vehicle and mr. brown standing at the drivers window. during the altercation, two shots were fired by offers a wilson while still inside the vehicle. mr. brown ran east and officer wilson gave chase. new the corner -- near the corner, mr. brown stopped and turned back to officer wilson. officer wilson also stop. as michael brown moved towards
officer wilson, several more shots were fired by the officer and michael brown was fatally wounded. within seconds of the final shot, the assist car arrived. less than 90 seconds passed between the first contact and the arrival of the assist car. during the investigation, eyewitnesses were interviewed by various news by outlets. witnesses were interviewed by local and federal law enforcement. sometimes together and sometimes separately. providedtatements were to the other party. all previous statements of witnesses who testified before the grand jury for also presented to the grand jury whether they were media interviews or interviews by the fbi or by the county police department. the statements of all witnesses, civilian, law-enforcement,
experts were challenged by other law enforcement, by the prosecutors and the grand jury themselves. a highly effective method for challenging a statement is to compare it to the previous statements of the witness for consistency and to compare it with the physical evidence. the physical evidence does not change because of public pressure or personal agenda. physical evidence does not look away as events unfold nor does it blackout or added to memory. it remains constant and is a solid foundation upon which cases are built. statements change, witnesses were confronted with the inconsistencies and conflict between their statements and the physical evidence. some witnesses admitted they did not actually see the shooting or only saw part of the shooting. only repeating what they heard on the street. some others adjusted parts of their statements to fit the facts. others stood by original
statements even though their statements were completely discredited by the physical evidence. several witnesses describe seeing an altercation in the car between mr. brown and officer wilson. it was described as wrestling, tug-of-war. several other witnesses described mr. brown as punching officer wilson while mr. brown was partially inside the vehicle. many of the witnesses said they heard a gunshot while mr. brown was still partially inside the vehicle. at least one witness said that no part of mr. brown was ever inside the vehicle and that the shot was fired through an open window while mr. brown was standing outside. the vehicle and officer wilson's clothing and equipment was examined by various technicians and scientists. mr. brown's blood and or dna were located on the outside of the drivers door. his blood and dna were found on the outside of the left rear passenger door. dna wasn's blood and
found on the inside of the driver door. of officereft thigh wilson's pant leg, the front caller of officer wilson assured and on officer wilson's weapon. additionally, a bullet fired from officer wilson's weapon was located inside the driver door. the shot was fired from inside the vehicle striking the door in a downward angle at the armrest. the second bullet was not recovered. regarding the gunshot wounds of mr. brown, it should be noted that the three separate autopsies were conducted -- one by st. louis county medical office, one by a private pathologist, one by the department of defense. the result of all three autopsies were consistent with one another in all significant respects. mr. brown had a gunshot graze wound on his right thumb.
the path was away from the tip of the hand consistent with a close range gunshot. wilson also had a medical examination which indicated some swelling and redness to his face. almost all witnesses stated that after they heard the shots fired while mr. brown was up a car, he hesitated and then ran east. most stated that almost immediately, officer wilson got out of his vehicle and chased after him. some witnesses stated wilson fired at mr. brown as he chased after him striking him at least -- at least one witness said one of the shots struck mr. brown. other stated he did not fire until mr. brown turned and came back towards the officer. at least one witness stated that as officer wilson got out of his vehicle, he shot mr. brown multiple times as mr. brown stood next to the vehicle.
yet another witness stated that officer wilson stuck his gun outside the window and fired at mr. brown as mr. brown was running. one witness stated there was actually two police vehicles. most witnesses agreed that new the corner -- near the corner, mr. brown stopped and turned around facing officer wilson. sunsetted mr. brown did not move towards officer wilson at all but were shot multiple times as he stood near the corner with his hands raised. in subsequent interviews with law enforcement or other testimony before the grand jury, many of the same witnesses said they did not actually see the shooting. summer running for cover, some were relating what they heard from others or they said what they assumed happened in that case. several other witnesses maintained their original statement that mr. brown had his hands in the air and was not
moving towards the officer when he was shot. others said he was shot -- it's several witnesses stated that mr. brown did not raise his hands at all or that he raised them briefly and then drop them and turned towards officer wilson who fired several rounds. other witnesses stated mr. brown stopped for a very brief period and move towards officer wilson again. one describes his movement as a full charge. according to some witnesses, officer wilson stopped firing when mr. brown stopped moving towards him and resumed firing when mr. brown started moving towards him again. these witnesses did not make any statements to the media. the description of how mr. raised his hands or the position of his hands, is not consistent among the witnesses. some describe is and is being out to his sides, some said in front of him.
some said his aunt raised by his head or by his shoulders. others describe his hands is being in a running position or interests -- in fists. there are various witness statements regarding mr. brown's movement after he stopped and turned back towards officer wilson. several witnesses said mr. brown never moved towards officer wilson when he was shot. the shots were fired as he moved towards wilson. mr. brown's movements were walking, moving fast, stumbling or full charge. varying descriptions were sometimes provided by the same witnesses in subsequent statements for testimony. the entire area was processed by the st. louis county crime scene unit. a total of 12 rounds were fired by officer wilson. two shots of the car, 10 more
farther east. mr. brown sustained a graze wound to his thumb while standing next to the vehicle. he sustained six or seven more gunshot wounds depending upon whether one of the shots was an entry or reentry wound. mr. brown sustained a second graze wound, and other graze wound, to his right bicep. he also sustained wounds to his right forearm, upper front right arm, lateral right chest, upper right chest, for head and top of the head. the top of the head, forehead and perhaps the upper right chest were consistent with his body being bent forward at the waist. except for the first and last wound, the medical examiners were unable to determine the order of the shots. to graze wound of the thumb sustained at the vehicle was likely the first wound. it was the only close range shot.
the shot at the top of the head was most likely the last. it would've rendered him immediately unconscious and incapacitated. mr. brown's body was located approximately 153 feet east of officer wilson's car. mr. brown's blood was located approximately 25 feet farther east past his body. and nearby tenet during a video chat inadvertently captured the final ted shots -- 010 shots on tape. there was a string of shots followed by a brief pause and then another string of shots. earlier, the evidence and the testimony will be released following the statement. i am ever mindful that this decision will not be accepted by some and may cause disappointment for others. all decisions in the criminal justice system must be
determined by the physical and scientific evidence and the credible testimony corroborated by that evidence, not in response to public outcry. decisions on a matter is serious in charging an individual with a crime cannot be decided on anything less than complete examination of all available evidence. anything less is not justice. it is my sworn duty and that of the grand jury to seek justice and not simply obtain an indictment or conviction. during this extremely tense and painful time that we have, the citizens of this community should be and are very mindful of the fact that the whole world is watching and watching how we respond and how we react. i would urge each and every one of them with the loss of that was suffered by the brown family, no young man should ever died. this is a tragic loss regardless of the circumstances.
it is open old wounds and given us an opportunity now to address those wounds as opposed to where they just fade away in the past. how many years we have talked about the issues of that lead to incidents like this. yet after a time, it just fades away. i urge everyone who was engaged in the conversation, engaged in the demonstrations to keep that going. not to let that go. to do it in a constructive way, i way we can profit from this. a way that we can benefit from this by changing the structure, changing some of the issues, by solving the issues that lead to the sorts of things. with michael brown's family, the clergy, with anyone and everyone else -- the end of -- the naacp. the urban league. every government official, encouragingzen
everyone to continue the demonstration, continued the discussion, address the problems but do so in a constructive way, not destructive. i have time for a few questions now. yes, sir? the gentleman in the black sweater. >> the grand jury made his decision unanimously? can you tell us if you presented any charges, recommending any charges to be brought by the grand jury? >> the first question is whether -- the grand jury by statute is not allowed or in my allowed to ask or to discuss the vote or the deliberation themselves. the grand jury is a very secret process. it should be in order to protect that secrecy. to protect the witnesses so people can come out and talk about it and speak freely.
jury deliberations in the grand jury or trial jury are not recorded. in a trial, the unanimous by by statute, the grand jury is not allowed to ask what the verdict -- what the vote was nor are they allowed to ask what the discussion was, the opinions expressed. i did not present -- no. my assistance did all the presentation in the grand jury. we prepare potential charges for that and presented five charges, indictments. yes, sir? >> i heard you describe some very problematic witness statements. would you go after perjury charges? >> i think there are number of witnesses who truly believe what they said. the ones who were consistent throughout even in the face of
their testimony being in conflict with the evidence, i think they truly believe that is what they saw. but, they didn't so no. some of the others, yes. they all pretty much said they saw parts and made up things. >> there have been many that have been critical of this process calling it a secret trial. do you regret taking this to the grand jury? do you wish there was a other forum? >> not at all. i don't regret this. i think it was a good decision to take it to the grand jury. we presented to this grand jury all of the evidence that we could possibly have. all of which that will be available as we finish this tonight. everyone will be able to examine that same evidence and come to
their own conclusion. i know people are not going to go home and read everything that was on their and make a decision based on that. you need to keep in mind that these grand jurors hold their hearts and souls into this process. their term was scheduled to end in early september and they gave up their lives. they put their lives on hold, but their families on hold, they put everything on hold so they can come in and do their civic duty. it was a very emotional process for them. i met with them before any evidence started to tell him what the process was going to be. i met with them today after the decision. i can tell you how emotional and how draining it was for each and every one of them. somehow it ist not a full and fair process is unfair to these people. they poured their hearts and souls into this.
yes, ma'am? can you tell us any more about the grand jury? we have heard some very basic demographics -- race. can you tell us the basic ages? >> i really cannot. that was the information the judge allowed to be released on the demographics. that anyn tell you is judge takes a grand jury as they are looking for a cross-section of st. louis county. that almost any demographic category you can come up with is going to be represented on that grand jury. various ages, where they live, how they live, retired, still working, blue-collar professional. almost anything you can think of will be on that grand jury. it tends to be that way across
the spectrum. >> were there any african-american witnesses who testified that michael brown was coming towards the officer? >> yes. the ones i mentioned specifically about -- were all african-americans. came atwho indicated he him at a full charge and officer wilson fired shots at him. mr. brown stopped. as mr. brown started charging again -- this was his testimony -- mr. wilson started shooting again. the others had a very consistent stories. not just their testimony throughout but consistent with the others. they were all african-american. yes, sir? >> can you tell us a little
bit about officer wilson's testimony and his status tonight. >> i have no idea what his status is but his testimony is in the package that will be released. his testimony -- these are questions that were asked by the grand jury. questioning him and challenging him on why he didn't use lesser force, why he didn't run away. rather than get into the specifics, he did testify that he was sitting in the car and was punched by an mr. brown. i think all of that information is out there. i specifically did not do that because the target or the suspect has the most interest in the case. we don't put a whole lot of stock or cannot rely solely upon the testimony. yes, sir? the blue shirt.
you mentioned there is video of the final 10 shots. will that be released with the rest of the evidence? >> i assume that microphone is going somewhere -- >> the video of the final 10 shots. >> there is not video, there is audio. he was chatting in the background. it should be in the package but if not we will get the audio out. yes, sir? >> the people who were protesting tonight might say -- they would say this jury had nine whites on it, three blacks. they say you ever be tatian of being pro-police. what do you say to somebody that things it was not just this? tice?t just this -- jus >> it has to be based upon all the information that is available. you can certainly take a witness
here and there and come to a different conclusion. theink everybody will have ability to look at every bit of evidence and information and all the testimony. i understand that some people made up their minds both ways and are not going to change. what i would urge them to do is express those feelings. express them in a constructive way and try to make some changes so that nothing like this ever happens again. yes, ma'am? >> you just explained that we need to work on issues so that this kind of thing will not happen again. can you explain what are some of those things that need to happen and are any of them including whether or not the least should sue somebody whose hands may be at their stomach or sides or maybe up in the air and they are unarmed? >> it is difficult to answer. it is impossible to answer questions like that. there are so many variables that play into every case. there is no way to answer a
question like that. you have to look at every bit of information. the idea is to avoid ever being in that situation. yes, sir? some had his record feelioned -- how do you announcing this decision and what message do you think it sends to the community that says they have had numerous members predominantlynity black males killed by police with impunity. what kind of message do you think this sense that i'm? them?d to >> we have had a young white men who tragically have been killed by police officers.
we look at each and every one of those and hopefully learn from each. how to avoid being in that situation in the future. i think that is what has to do it. the people in the community, they need to make their voices heard and need to address those issues so we are never in this position again. yes, sir? >> i think of people looking at this will be struck by the fact there is not a single law in the state of missouri that protects and valleys the life of this young man who unquestionably was shot and killed by the police officer. what do you say to people who wonder is there something wrong with the laws here that allows this to happen, that after this happens says we just move on essentially and that this is justice? is her something wrong with the laws in the state?
>> there is another question that i don't have an answer. there are no laws to protect us. every law out there is to protect the safety of every individual regardless of their age or race. if those laws are not working, we need to work to change them. that is about all -- that is what we should be doing and that is where this needs to go from here. accused of sibley standing back and putting all of this evidence in front of the grand jury and set of taking a stand. shouldn't you have taken a stand on this case? >> there is not anybody in the office, no onee individual as the ultimate or absolute authority. if charges were filed in this case as they are filed in other cases, the case would still go
to preliminary hearing or to the grand jury. there still has to be a probable cause determination. no one can just file a charge and go directly to a jury trial. that cannot happen. we have an obligation to present the evidence. know anybody could say we are passing the buck by gathering this evidence and meeting with a grand jury. we do that day in and day out. it is not passing the buck. yes, ma'am? do you have a specific vote breakdown and what is the possibility of federal charges? >> i cannot give you a vote breakdown because i don't know that. i cannot ask nor the grand jury can reveal that. the federal investigation is still ongoing. they have all the information that we have. they had it as we got it. they got it within a day or two.
interview,id an within hours, that was in the hand of the department of justice. they will conduct their interview an investigation. they are looking at different types of laws and violations. when they will complete that, i have no insight. >> did any witnesses refused to testify and if so how was that handled? >> there were a few witnesses who were not brought in. one were witnesses who -- did not make a statement. a couple did disappear. we spent a lot of time searching for them with the assistance of the fbi vote could not locate them.
in one case, think we had a statement from the witness. it was not presented to the grand jury. there were a couple of them. yes, ma'am? said officer wilson's description of browne movement towards him as a charge. evidence any other that might have led the grand jury to conclude wilson had reasonable cause for the use of deadly force? >> i am not privy to the deliberations so i cannot say what they saw as highly significant or not. but, they had all the information and they were charged with and told to consider all of the evidence and information. it is not just one bit of evidence that says that as it. that is all we need to hear. it is everything that is presented which is why we wanted to make this as thorough as possible.
>> what justification will you be using to release the grand jury evidence? that has been some dispute as to whether a court order will be needed to present what you are presenting tonight. >> i want not bore you with all the legal details and technicalities of it. it is now a close investigation which makes it an open file. a lot more complicated and complex than that but essentially that is how it operates. when it is a closed investigation, it is an open file. that is the basis. we are following the sunshine law. there was no specific request for it. i thought it was important in the first place to release the information. yes, ma'am? obviously, many are not happy with this decision tonight, especially the family of michael brown. if they are watching, what would
the family will have that lost forever. or young manicer should be killed by a police officer. no police officer should ever be put in that position. that is why keep urging people to keep this talk of going. so many times we have seen the discussion starts and then it fades away and then we have the same issues and we are back here again. i don't ever want to be back here. we have a cute that discussion going and everybody has to stay engaged. this is a horrible tragedy and we don't want to see it repeated. thank you. >> the announcement from bob mccullough in the missouri court house. he is the thing that was county prosecuting attorney. the announcement will be their own be no indictment for the ferguson, missouri police officer. we will open the phone lines. we are also checking tweets,
including this from congressman john lewis from georgia who says -- i know this is hard. i know this is difficult. do not succumb to the temptations of violence. there is a more carful way. also, from the st. louis post-dispatch that darren wilson will not face the charges. we will review statements from members of congress. we are keeping an eye on the white house. the president will have comments in the next couple of minutes as he reacts. calls and reactions. james from los angeles, independent line. good evening. >> thank you for taking my call. i don't understand the motivation for putting on that 30 minutes of preamble to the decision.
he went over and got involved with this incident. why didn't he say how many times he shot the guy? if there was really a was this guy suicidal? he saw it cop with a and charged him? i don't know anybody that would do that. i'm really upset me i don't get it. guys welcomelcome my listeners on c-span radio. reacting to the news from ferguson, missouri. in --mbers to call the caller from laffey yet, indiana.